Book Review: Management Rewired
 Subscribe to the Three Star Leadership Blog |
| The Working Supervisor's Support Kit is a collection of information and tools to help working supervisors do a better job. It's based on what Wally's learned in over twenty years of supervisory skills training. |
| Follow me on Twitter |
| For weekly tips and resources pointers, check Wally's Three Star Leadership Letter |
| Find out more about having Wally speak to your company or convention. |
| Find out more about Wally's coaching services. |
 |
When I first saw heard about the book, Management Rewired: Why Feedback Doesn't Work and Other Surprising Lessons from the Latest Brain Science, by Charles Jacobs, I got excited. There's been a lot of research in the last decade about how we perceive the world and how our sensory systems and brains work. I expected the book to be about what we've learned.
The subtitle and publicity material make some very provocative claims. We're told that "feedback doesn't work" and that "setting measureable objectives often backfires on managers" to name two. I expected the book to support those assertions.
But this book doesn't do either of those things. Instead it's filled with selectively chosen research that is more from the last century than the latest brain research.
The author claims that "feedback doesn't work." The way he supports that assertion seems characteristic of the book.
To quote the book:"a landmark study at General Electric found that the company's performance appraisal system didn't work, it produced results that were virtually the opposite of what was intended."
First, it's not a "landmark study" within any common meaning of the term. The article is cited only six times in scholarly literature
The researchers did not study feedback. They studied the performance appraisal system in place at GE. Their comments on feedback were about feedback as delivered in an annual performance appraisal and a system where it was common that the annual appraisal was the only time a worker received feedback. GE has since changed this procedure in several ways.
The study (named "Split Roles in Performance Appraisal") was based on the analysis of less than one hundred questionnaires. Not a real big or broad sample.
This is not "the latest brain science" either. The study in question was reported in the Harvard Business Review issue for January-February 1965.
So the conclusion that "feedback doesn't work" turns out to be based primarily on a small study of one company's performance appraisal system as it existed almost half a century ago.
Other studies are also offered to support this "surprising lesson." There is one by Leon Festinger that is mentioned but not cited. It deals with cognitive dissonance produced when people are paid to lie.
Elliot Aronson is one of the greatest of psychologists. But his studies cited here involve children solving puzzles and playing or not playing with toys based on the reward system used. They don't relate to management and they aren't "the latest brain science."
The author also cites research by George Homans on how people respond when they do not get a reward they expect. Homans says they get angry. This is not exactly cutting edge, either.
So, let's review. The research cited is not "the latest brain science." This is old stuff.
The only study that involves the workplace involves a small sample in one company four decades ago. And the study was on the performance appraisal system, not feedback.
The other studies are the kind of laboratory psychology that is difficult to translate into practical actions you can take in the workplace. Even so, they are selectively quoted. If you read only this book, you would never know that there's a lot of solid academic research that comes to very different conclusions.
Weasel wording abounds in the book. Jacobs says, "Setting measurable objectives often backfires on the manager." But when you read that text it turns out that the real finding is that "setting measurable objectives without team member participation often backfires." Any manager who's ever tried that could have told you.
There are lots of other findings that just don’t' seem all that "surprising." Here are some.
"Smaller rewards tend to be more motivational that larger rewards." This is not news. My grandmother knew it which is why she always gave us lots of small presents instead of fewer big ones.
"Being competitive is often the best way to encourage cooperation." This is a workplace staple when one team or shift or plant competes with another.
"Pay increases don't motivate." We've known for decades that for most people most of the time pay is a hygiene factor, not a motivation factor.
There you have it. The "surprising lessons" in this book are only sketchily supported by carefully selected "evidence." Other lessons really aren't that surprising. And only a pinch of those lessons have anything to do with the latest brain science.
Don't waste your time or money on this book.
Wally's Working Supervisor's Support Kit is a collection of information and tools to help working supervisors do a better job. It's based on what Wally's learned in over twenty years of supervisory skills training. Click here to check it out.
Categories: Leadership Reading, Book Review, Management
Tags: Leadership Reading Book Review Management
Hi Wally,
Thanks for the review and the caution on this book. I am a biologist by education and spent my early years as a lab scientist - so the current plethora of brain science material has definitely drawn me in, particularly as it relates to management, leadership, or the workplace. I find that even the newer, more current state of the art on brain science and leadership and management to be misleading at best. There seems to be a great misunderstanding about what constitutes real science and simple speculation. The information, although interesting and certainly good hypothetically, is pretty much the latter - speculation. The connection between brain activity and actual behavior needs a lot of study.
There are certainly new methodologies that are allowing scientists to get a better handle on brain activity and speculate the outward behaviors that accompany whats going on inside the brain. But I'll hold my breath until we have some really good scientific studies that are more conclusive.
Thanks for starting the conversation on this interesting topic.
Reply to this
Thanks for that comment, Mary Jo. I didn't think it was worth commenting on some of the statements about brain science that are in this book. Here's one: "the fMRI shows us that objective reasoning has nothing to do with the way we solve problems" Actually, what the fMRI does is show us images which we interpret and none of those I've heard about lead to the conclusion that objective reasoning has "nothing to do" with how we solve problems. The book doesn't mention technologies that have been in use for quite a while, such as PET s scans which were being used by brain scientists like Marian Diamond to learn about the brain over a decade
Reply to this
Wally does us a favour by exposing the inadequate research base for this book. Claims for counterintuitive originality always need to be checked in this way.
I spent years trying to persuade my students to check the original research papers before uncritically accepting a proposition, from any source including government reports. Authority does not imply validity.
Reply to this
Thanks for making that excellent general point. Claims for counterintuitive originality DO need to be checked out. A lot of times what's behind the curtain will surprise you.
Reply to this
Great piece of writing. I appreciate and totally agree with the points. It feels really good when you can find people sharing such excellent thoughts. Thanks again for the fine piece of writing.
Reply to this
Thanks for those kind words.
Reply to this
thanks for the critique. i just read the first few chapters building the cog sci background from where the rest of the arguments will be built and was debating whether or not to continue.
the functional aspects of the neurobiology and representation in the mind are the same findings i studied 15 years ago. both damasio and gazzaniga are exceptional researchers who have been producing very interesting work for decades, and these are great references for anyone interested in how our understanding of the world is shaped by both our material structures and our history of experience. merleau-ponty's work on perception spoke volumes to these issues as well-sixty years ago.
i'll quickly finish off the book and see what the connections with management theory are. good to see my trepidation with the dated research and weak conclusions in the first few chapters were picked up by other readers.
Reply to this
Thanks for stopping by and sharing your observations, Jeff. I hope you'll return when you've finished the book and share any final conclusions or recommendations.
One of the great disappointments for me is that there is an incredible amount that we've learned in the last few decades about how the brain and nervous system work and what that might mean for working managers. You mention two great contributors to that increase in knowledge. Joseph LeDoux's work on the emotional brain, or Roger Schank's artificial intelligence research that gives us insight on how stories work and all the work on the plasticity of the brain are just bits of what we've learned.
Reply to this
i finished the book and have to say it could be a good read for those unfamiliar with cog sci or management. that said, there are two distinct threads that cover the generalities of the subjects. what i'm interested in is the connection between the two, most especially in light of recent findings over the last decade, but, sadly, this is where the major weakness of the book lies.
Reply to this
Thanks for coming back and letting us know your thoughts after completing the book. I'm sure readers will find that helpful.
Reply to this